Gil Jesus

How corrupt is today's Democrat Party ? Corrupt enough to cause a Kennedy to endorse a Republican. "Governments and oppressors don't censor lies. They don't fear lies. They fear the truth. And that's what they censor." --- RFK Jr.

Whether Trump will or will not release the remaining files remains to be seen, but it sounds like the attempt on his own life last month may have had an influence on where he stands now.

Exactly. Everything the police said he said is hearsay. The Commission's mandate as stated in the Katzenbach Memo was that "the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial." On this point the Commission failed miserably. While the Lone Nutters argue that the Commission's hearings were not a trial, the Katzenbach Memo held the hearings to the same standard. But the Commission allowed a wife to testify against her husband, allowed hearsay evidence and refused to allow the cross examination of witnesses by counsel representing the Oswald family. It also accepted evidence whose chain of custody was either broken or never established at the point of discovery. The Commission violated every rule of judicial proceeding and conduct. In short, the Commission acted as a prosecutor, in that it presented the prosecution's case. This wasn't an investigation. It was a collection of evidence against one suspect. Any reasonable, impartial and prudent juror would recognize the unfairness of convicting a defendant on the prosecution's case alone without hearing from the defense. Unfortunately, there are people out there who believe that a defendant is guilty until proven innocent.

And Nichols mentioned that in his appearance before the press. https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/abt-or-ACLU.mp4 But the ACLU was afraid of the Dallas Police and never pushed them to see Oswald.

Amen

A lot of people don't understand that one's rights under the Constitution do not begin with a Supreme Court decision, but instead begin at birth. These are rights not afforded an individual by the state or any court but rather by his/her Creator. FWIW, Escobedo was a 1960 case that took 4 years to get to the Supreme Court. The court's ruling proves my point that Escobedo's rights were violated in 1960, not 1964. Likewise with the Miranda case, a 1963 case that took 3 years to get to the Court, Miranda's rights were violated in 1963, not 1966. Honestly, I don't find any gray area in this at all. IMO, had Oswald been convicted, his conviction would have been overturned on appeal.

Exactly. They would have "found" him hanging in his cell.

Anything police alleged Oswald said during his interrogation sessions would have been inadmissible in court. You can't question a suspect after he's asked for a lawyer until the lawyer is present.

How honest and informed are people who are willing to listen to only one side of the story ? It's like a juror who only hears the prosecution's side of the case and renders a verdict based on that. The Commission was never impartial, in fact, before it heard its first witness, its outline of its work used phrases like, "Oswald as President Kennedy's assassin" and such. In a January 11, 1964 memo, “For the Members of the Commission”, Chief Counsel J. Lee Rankin outlined the areas of the Commission’s “work”. In this memo, he used the phrases, “Lee Harvey Oswald as the Assassin of President Kennedy”, “Evidence Demonstrating Oswald’s Guilt”, “Evidence Identifying Oswald as the Assassin of President Kennedy”, the “Permissable Inferences of Oswald’s Murder of Tippit“, “Lee Harvey Oswald: Background and Possible Motives” and “Lee H. Oswald as the Assassin”. Keep in mind that this memo naming Oswald as the President’s lone assassin, was written almost one month BEFORE the Commission heard its first witness or saw its first piece of evidence. And in the last link you can see that it deemed the curtain rod story a "fake" before it had even heard from the witnesses. ( red arrow ) Strange behavior for a Commission that was ( according to the lone nutters ) honest and truthful.

I would agree with that with the condition that "false interpretation" be replaced with "misinterpretation". A misintepretation is an error that may well be innocent in nature, while posting false evidence could be construed as intentional. This is why it's always important to cite your sources. I've erred in the past in another forum by repeating something I'd read in a book. When I went back to look for the author's source, there was none. So I started marking all my documents on file with the source at the top in red. And I made sure that anything I used was cited. Misinterpretation may be an innocent mistake, but to avoid being accused of posting false evidence, it's always best to post your source. And that goes for the Lone Nutters as well. It's important for them to understand that what they've read in the "Oswald-Did-It" books is not evidence any more than William Cooper's bleached out version of the Zapruder film is "proof" that Greer shot Kennedy. A few weeks ago, I posted a list of about 50 things which should have been true if Oswald was guilty of the two murders. Not one Lone Nutter responded to that list. That's how you debate them.

How do you handle LN disinformation ? You respond with evidence. Citations, testimony and documents. My experience with LNers has taught me that they never tell you the whole story. Only what they want you to know. It's called, "deception by omission" and it's the same tactic used by the CIA, FBI and the WC. Another tactic they use is circular reasoning, where instead of proving a premise which leads to a true conclusion, they accept the conclusion as true and circle back to the premise reasoning that the premise is also true. For example, they conclude that since police took the handgun away from Oswald at the Texas Theater, ( conclusion ) he picked the gun up at REA Express ( premise ). Of course this type of reasoning is flawed because it doesn't eliminate other possibilites, especially in light of the fact that no one from REA Express was ever called to give testimony and that there is a question of whether the gun was in Oswald's possession or McDonald tried to stick it in his waistband, which Oswald responded to by punching him. What "deception by omission" was the FBI trying to hide by not calling pertinent witnesses from REA ? Was this handgun picked up by someone with a badge ? But I digress. Let them quote their Bugliosis, Myerses, Posners and whoevers. I have all of them on ignore. If you don't like what they say, I suggest you do the same. Don't give them an audience. Mostly what they bring to the table are opinions, speculations and sarcasm. I'm not interested in their nonsense because it's not evidence. I'm only interested in the evidence. All of the lies the government tells us eventually get exposed for what they are. It may take some time, but the truth always prevails. When you folks opened up the forum and accepted new members, you let them in. You even reinstated one LNer who had been banned. Now you want to censor them ? I'm for freedom of speech. Let the Lone Nutters say whatever they want. It can all be proven to be false with evidence.

Stop it Mike, you're making too much sense. All this fearmongering of Trump making himself a dictator is ridiculous. America will NEVER have a dictator, Trump or anyone else. The Constitution guarantees that will never happen. No "kings" in America. Trump didn't become a "dictator" in his first term and he won't become one in his second. He'll do his four years and, unable to run for a third term, he'll leave office just like everyone before him. My God, things were so bad in those first four years he was in office, weren't they ? What he WILL be is what he already is, a power in the Republican party, whose candidates in '28 will all seek his endorsement. Any idea that he will make himself a dictator is just silly. And I remind my fellow posters that this is the kind of rhetoric that incites weak minded nutjobs like Thomas Matthew Crooks to act violently ( believing they're saving America from Trump and his followers ). What you CAN expect in Trump's second term is more impeachments and more attempts on his life, thanks in part to the mainstream media and their brainwashing of America. Because the haters just never quit. And consider this: if one's hatred for one man is greater than his/her love for this country, then that person may be part of the problem. SMH

That moment when someone says, "I can't believe you would vote for Trump.” I simply reply, “I'm not voting for Trump.” I'm voting for the First Amendment and freedom of speech. I'm voting for the Second Amendment and my right to defend my life and my family. I'm voting for the next Supreme Court Justice(s) to protect the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I’m voting for the continued growth of my retirement and reducing inflation. I’m voting for the end to America’s involvement in foreign conflicts. I'm voting for American energy independence. I'm voting for the Electoral College and for the Republic in which we live. I'm voting for the Police to be respected once again and to ensure Law & Order. I am tired of all the criminals having a revolving door and being put back in the street. I’m voting for the continued appointment of Federal Judges who respect the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I’m voting for keeping jobs in America and not be outsourced all over the world - to China, Mexico and other foreign countries. I’m voting for secure borders and LEGAL immigration. I’m voting for doing away with all of the freebies given to the illegals while inner city American citizens go without. I'm voting for the end to homelessness, including that of our Military Veterans who fought for this Country to give the American people their freedoms. I'm voting for the unborn babies that have a right to live. I’m voting for peace in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. I’m voting for the end of human/child trafficking. I'm voting for Freedom of Religion. I'm voting for parents to have the right of School Choice. I'm voting for parents to know what their children are being taught in school. I'm voting for the right to not be censored or cancelled. I'm voting to clean up the corruption in government. I am voting for the return of teaching math, history, and science instead of the indoctrination of our children with pronouns. I'm voting for the end of sexual mutilation of children. I'm voting for the end of biological men competing in women's sports. I'm voting for the end of drag queens twerking in front of kids. I'm not voting for one person, I'm voting for the future of my Country. I'm voting for my children and my grandchildren to ensure their freedoms and their future. THAT's what I'm voting for. What are YOU voting for ?

Just like the Warren Commission before him.

Good point Denny, here's a couple of more: Solved by cops who couldn't tell the difference between .38 shells, although they were clearly marked. Cops who couldn't tell a white jacket from a "greyish-tan" jacket, although they held it in their hands. Cops who didn't know enough to secure Elm St. as a crime scene. Ten minutes after the assassination, ( 12:40 pm ) they were allowing traffic to use Elm St., destroying any evidence that might be there. They also didn't know enough to secure the Tippit murder scene, allowing citizens to find and handle evidence. But these same idiots were smart enough to arrest the real assassin on the first try, miles away from the crime scene, for entering a theater without paying. Even though he had just murdered two people and he had $13.87 on his person, rather than flee by bus or taxi, he decided that he'd risk being arrested by beating the Texas Theater out of a 90 cent ticket. This is what "makes sense" to the Warren Commission and its followers. IMO, the Lone Nutters aren't here because they believe the official story. They're here because they hate conspiracy theorists. And they come from all over the world to disrupt forums like this one. Harold Weisberg and Tom Rossley were good friends. Rossley and I were good friends. Harold once gave Tom advice that he passed on to me, "hit 'em with the evidence". So that's what I do. They can't deal with the inconsistencies in the evidence, inconsistencies that would not exist if the case against Oswald was legitimate. You can show evidence after evidence of Oswald's innocence and the Lone Nutters simply ignore it. You can try to explain to them that the way the authorities handled Oswald, the evidence and the witnesses is not consistent with a case in which they arrested the right man. You can prove that the police lineups were unfair. You can show them that the FBI lied in their reports about what the witnesses said. You can show them that the prosecutory system in Dallas was corrupt, that the DA's office was only interested in conviction rates ( percentage of convictions from arrests ) and not necessarily capturing the real perpetrator of a crime. You can show them that the Dallas DA had a history of convicting innocent people, that he withheld evidence that proved a defendant's innocence and that he even sent an innocent man to the electric chair. All of these things call into question the credibility of the police, the DA's office, the FBI and their criminal cases. You can show them all of this and they simply ignore it. Why ? What makes a reasonable and prudent person completely ignore evidence of prosecutory corruption in framing an innocent man for crimes he did not commit ? Back then, they did it all the time. They impanelled all-white juries which convicted black defendants of crimes they didn't commit. In cases where whites were charged with crimes against blacks, all white juries were impanelled and refused to convict. Ever hear of Emmett Till ? How can they ignore such corruption in the criminal justice system in the 1960s South and in Dallas County in particular ? You'll have to ask them. Because the truth lies in hearing BOTH sides of the case, not just the prosecution's side. And that's not something they want to hear.

Earlene Roberts, Oswald's housekeeper, says in this video that Oswald entered the rooming house after 1 o'clock and that she saw him out at the bus stop after he left. https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/roberts-at-bus-stop.mp4 She testified that he was in his room "about 3 or 4 minutes". ( 6 H 438 ) In her affidavit of Dec. 5, 1963, she said that Oswald was "standing on the curb at the bus stop, just to the right and on the same side of the street as our house." ( 7 H 439 ) THIS IS AT THE SAME TIME HELEN MARKHAM IS LEAVING HER APARTMENT FOR THE 2 1/2 MINUTE WALK TO THE CORNER OF PATTON AVE AND 10TH STREET. There is no way in hell that Oswald could have walked from that bus stop to the corner of 10th and Patton in the 2 1/2 minutes the FBI said it took Markham to get there. Oswald was witnessed STANDING at the bus stop at 1:03-1:04. He wasn't walking and he wasn't headed towards the Tippit murder scene. In fact, that bus stop was for a northbound bus that would have taken him AWAY from the murder scene. Even if he had immediately left the bus stop after Roberts turned away, ( according to the FBI ) it would have taken him 14 minutes to arrive at the crime scene, or 1-2 minutes AFTER Bowley had made his call on the police radio ( according to the dictabelt and transcripts ). Oswald didn't kill Tippit.

She never said anything about a 1:22 bus either, so what's your point ?

I have no idea. I'm not from the area. All I'm aware of is what the evidence said back in 1964.

Mr. Von Pein's "basic fact" isn't a fact at all, but instead is a link to another one of his usual sarcastic tirades on how "somebody else used Oswald's gun". What's "staggering" is how he can refer to the pistol as Oswald's when he can't produce documentation from REA Express that Oswald even received the weapon. Before you can call it Oswald's, you have to prove that it wasn't a, "throw down" that McDonald tried to place into Oswald's waistband. You do that by producing documentation from REA Express that Oswald, in fact, received the weapon. Mr. Von Pein also ignores the FACT that the bullets removed from Tippit's body did not match the revolver in evidence. Was this handgun the only .38 in the world that had been rechambered for .38 Special ammunition ? He also ignores the FACT that no witness put the time of the Tippit shooting at or after 1:15. He also ignores the FACT that the bullets removed from Tippit's body did not match the shell casings found at the scene. He ignores the FACT that the persons who found the shells could not identify the shells in evidence as the shells they found. This includes the police officer who marked the shells. This severely damages the chain of custody which should begin AT THE POINT OF DISCOVERY, not in some police lab. He ignores the FACT that three of the four spent shells found at the crime scene had initials on them of persons not known to be in the chain of custody of those shells. ( DPD Box 7, pg. 478 ) He ignores the FACT that witnesses to the shooting did not identify the coat in evidence as the coat the killer wore. He ignores the FACT that Helen Markham testified that she had never seen Oswald prior to the police lineup. He ignores the FACT that TWO witnesses saw Oswald INSIDE the Texas Theater prior to 1:15. The only one here ignoring the FACTS is Mr. Von Pein.

Ron, as usual, the Lone Nutters have nothing to contribute but guesses, opinions, speculations and "what makes sense". But no evidence. Markham testified that the shooting occurred BEFORE 1: 15 because she hadn't yet caught her bus. Mr BALL. You know what time you usually get your bus, don't you ? Mrs MARKHAM. 1:15 Mr. BALL So it was BEFORE 1:15 ? Mrs MARKHAM Yes it was. ( 3 H 306 ) NOT 1:22, NOT 1:25, she caught the 1:15 bus. It's been explained to these people time and time again. They refuse to accept it. I've shown where the times on the documents were altered, but they ignore that and still refer to those documents as if they are reliable. This isn't about "what makes sense" to Mr. Von Pein. It's about what the evidence says. At the same time Helen Markham is leaving her apartment, ( "a little after 1" / 3 H 306 ) Oswald is seen standing at a bus stop in front of his rooming house by Earlene Roberts. There's no way that he could have walked to the corner of 10th and Patton in the 2 1/2 minutes the FBI said it took her to get there. ( FBI file # 62-109060, Sec 54, pg. 134 ) Talk about "what makes sense". I don't give a rat's ass what Dale Myers says. Oswald didn't kill Tippit. Period.

Bob, what she referred to as the "1:15 bus" was actually scheduled to arrive at the corner of Jefferson and Patton Ave at 1:12. Here's the FBI report on what they found when they went to the bus company and inquired about the arrival time of the bus. In the white section of this document, you'll see that the FBI timed the walking distance from the washateria where Markham lived ( 328 East 9th St. ) to the corner of 10th and Patton. It was 2 1/2 minutes. Markham said that she left her apartment "a little after one". ( 3 H 306 ) This timing is completely consistent with her estimate that she arrived at 10th and Patton at 1:06. Anybody who believes that Tippit was shot at 1:15 or later must prove that Markham stood on that corner for almost 10 minutes. In order to suport their position that Tippit was shot after 1:15, some members have spectulated on this forum that Markham was going to meet the NEXT bus, at 1:22. But there's no evidence of that. Why would she call the 1:22 bus "the 1:15 bus" ? No, she was going to meet the bus that arrived at that bus stop around 1:12 and left at 1:15. This means that if the Tippit killing was at or after 1:15, she would have been on her bus. Markham's presence on the corner of 10th and Patton is the proof that the murder occurred BEFORE 1:15. And the Commission knew that because that's what she testified to. ( 3 H 306 ) More of the story that Myers doesn't tell you: https://gil-jesus.com/the-tippit-timing/

Let's tell the WHOLE story, shall we ? https://gil-jesus.com/the-tippit-witnesses/

Ben, report says that Trump shooter was observed with a rifle by one of the snipers 90 minutes before the shooting. That's 30 minutes earlier than was first reported. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/07/29/trump-assassination-attempt-shooting-new-details/74586581007/ From a personal protection stand point, this is unacceptable. He should have been confronted, checked for a permit ( which I'm sure he didn't have ) and arrested on the spot. I'm sorry but, "Oh, we failed that day" just doesn't cut it. A man was killed. They're not there just to protect Trump, they're there to protect the audience from a mass shooter as well. With 50 rounds of ammunition, it's clear his intention was to kill Trump and as many of his supporters as possible. Authorities' lack of response to an obvious threat makes no sense. It reminds me of the school shooting in Uvalde, where the police failed to confront the shooter. It wasn't until Border Patrol agents decided they would breach the classroom without seeking permission from Uvalde Police Chief Arredondo. That team killed the gunman at 12:51 p.m., ending the standoff. https://www.texastribune.org/2022/07/17/law-enforcement-failure-uvalde-shooting-investigation/ A guy walking around with a rifle and you don't do anything about it ? Either we're looking at massive ineptitude or they intentionally let this nutjob take up position and fire at the stage. If it was ineptitude, people need to be fired over this. If the Secret Service and the local and State Police are too afraid to do their jobs, then let the military do it. Or ICE or the Border Patrol. This sounds to me like a big lawsuit for the Comperatore family.

Joe, the only similarity I see between JFK and Trump is in how the Deep State hated each. In '63, you had a right-wing Deep State that hated JFK ( yeah they even hated him because he was a Catholic ) and today you have a left-wing Deep state that hates Trump. IMO, that's where the similarities end. I'm not a fan of political extremism either from the right or left, so I have no problem calling it out for what it was or is. That right-wing Deep State was well entrenched after the Second World War. It was further stengthened by the fear created by McCarthyism of the 1950s and the advancement of Soviet technology in science and space. With the civil unrest in the South in the early 60's, the South was particularly ( but not solely ) hateful of JFK. Abraham Bolden has exposed how the Secret Service hated JFK. Others have come forward over the years to show us that the military hated Kennedy. And of course, we know how the CIA felt about Kennedy. And J. Edgar Hoover was no big fan by any means. Evidence indicates that Hoover was receiving information that an assassination was going to be attempted and withheld that information from the Secret Service. The Secret Service drove Kennedy into an ambush and they knew it was going to happen. From the all-night drinking in Fort Worth, to the last-minute changes to the motorcade at Love Field, to William Greer's slowing of the limousine when the shooting started, the evidence indicates that the Secret Service was complicit in the assassination of President Kennedy. These actions were beyond the realm of negligence or ineptness, in my opinion. They were blatant and intentional acts designed to make an assassination attempt successful. How can you drive the President in an open convertible through as dangerous a city as Dallas was ? The weekend before, he had been helicoptered into a speech in Miami. Why wasn't he helicoptered into the Trade Mart ? The truth is that you can't kill the President of the United States if his bodyguards are doing their job. And then they illegally remove the body from the hospital at gun point ? They harass Dr. Perry into changing his opinion of the throat wound ? They swap the body into another casket ? All to hide their complicity ? Why did security break down in Dallas and why did security break down in Butler, PA ? There are many questions surrounding the security of the Trump rally. Some I have are: if a threat was identified before Trump took the stage, why didn't the Secret Service delay Trump's appearance until after the threat was eliminated ? Why did it take rally goers to see the kid on the roof and why didn't authorities respond immediately to their reports ? Why was the Secret Service absent from the 9 am security briefing ? Why wasn't everybody ( local, state and SS ) on the same radio frequency so they could communicate back and forth ? Why did the sniper team wait until the shooter started firing to shoot back ? Hopefully, we will get answers to those questions.

I'm not a Trump supporter either. But I don't vote based on tweets. I vote for someone based on their policies. I can't for the life of me figure out what is so evil about making America great again. Reagan used the same phrase in 1980. Back then it wasn't any big deal, in fact, no one even mentions it. But somehow, anyone associated with this movement is now a threat to democracy. LOL. Years ago, the Mainstream Media's focus was reporting the TRUTH. They would not print a story unless they had more than one source. Nowadays, it's all about being the first to break a story, whether or not it is true. Hence, you get stories that over time are exposed as being lies, like the Russian interference in the 2016 election and that Hunter Biden's laptop was Russian disinformation. And, oh yes, and now classified U.S. Department of State (State Department) documents credibly suggest COVID-19 originated from a lab related accident in Wuhan, China. https://oversight.house.gov/release/classified-state-department-documents-credibly-suggest-covid-19-lab-leak-wenstrup-pushes-for-declassification/ Didn't we crazy "conspiracy theorists" say that way back when ? Can you believe that they've gone as far as to suggest that the whole assassination attempt was staged by Trump ? My God, a man DIED. His wife is a widow, his children fatherless. How could anyone come up with something so ridiculous ? And they laugh at conspiracy theorists. It's funny how people's perspectives can change based on their own prejudices. For example, the same people who accept whole heartedly the Dallas doctors' opinions on JFK's head wound, can't accept the opinions of the Butler doctors on Trump's head wound. They can't accept the opinion of a military doctor with battlefield experience treating rifle wounds who concurs with those doctors. It really is comical in a sense to see how people's standards for credibility can change, depending which wounded President we're talking about. And then there are the Lone Nutters, who have no standard to measure credibility. If one witness has evidence of Oswald's guilt, he's credible. But if 20 or 30 witnesses have evidence of his innocence, they're either liars or mistaken. And don't get me started on egos and the role they play in this ( or any ) debate. Two years ago, at Christmas, I was talking to my brother about hatred in this culture for Trump and how it paralelled the hatred for JFK in 1963. He asked me if I thought Trump's life was in danger and I said it could be. When Trump was shot I was not surprised. Writer and philosopher George Santayana wrote, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."